Columbus, Ohio — The realities of the electoral map meant that the Romney campaign really had no choice but to bet big on Ohio, and that bet was a loser. In addition to some critical on-the-ground specifics — Ohio is not hurting as badly as the rest of the country — there were three main reasons for that.

1. Ohio likes crony capitalism. The automotive bailout is popular in Ohio, and not just among self-interested workers and investors in that industry. Putting General Motors on federal life support is economically daft and morally dubious, but it gave the Obama administration a powerful tool for convincing middle-class workers that the president is on their side. He might be doing something silly and destructive, but to be seen as doing something is politically useful. That it was General Motors and Chrysler was critical: Americans have a particularly romantic attitude toward automobile manufacturers, probably because Americans have a particularly romantic attitude toward automobiles. The (mostly mythical) image of the blue-collar homeowner supporting a four-person family in comfort by spending 40 hours a week on the assembly line is up there with mom and apple pie in the pantheon of American sentimentality. If President Obama had associated himself with the bailout of, say, Eastman Kodak — which will cease providing health care and other benefits to 56,000 retirees as part of its bankruptcy — it would not have imbued him with quite the same glow. And that is a specific instance of the more general and lamentable fact that . . .

2. Class warfare works. It is juvenile and it is economically illiterate, but a fair number of Americans worked themselves up into a lather over Mitt Romney’s paying a relatively low tax rate. Taxing capital gains at a lower rate than wages has been for a long time a mostly uncontroversial economic policy with fairly wide support across the partisan and ideological spectrum. When Bill Clinton signed into a law a reduction in the capital-gains tax rate, there was no mutiny on the left. More broadly, most voters do not have anything like the economic sophistication even to understand what Romney did at Bain Capital, much less how such private-equity firms provide real economic benefits. These are the citizens Bastiat had in mind when he wrote about what is seen and what is unseen: They can see outsourcing and declining manufacturing employment, but they cannot see (at least not very clearly) the benefits associated with integrated global supply chains or increases in manufacturing productivity. It may not be possible to be too thin, but it is, apparently, possible to be too rich, at least for an electorate that can be swayed by envy.

3. Repealing Obamacare was not a deal cincher in Ohio. A number of people I spoke to in the state suggested that the Romney-Ryan ticket paid too much attention to repealing Obamacare without spelling out an alternative that was sufficiently simple and attractive to voters who are not committed conservatives. One veteran of the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations argued that while Ohio voters may not be crazy about the Affordable Care Act, neither are they burning partisans of the campaign to repeal it. As with the GM bailout, many voters regard Obamacare as an example of the administration’s trying to do something for them, even if they are not entirely sold on the particulars.

There is not much in this to comfort conservatives. The lessons of Ohio are that Barack Obama is a skillful demagogue, that the ancients were wise to number envy among the deadly sins, and that offering Americans a check is a more fruitful political strategy than offering them the opportunity to take control of and responsibility for their own lives. This is what Oakeshott had in mind when he wrote that liberty was something that many people simply are not equipped to “enjoy as an opportunity rather than suffer as a burden.”

For many years, Republicans have relied on Jude Wanniski’s “Two Santa Claus” theory, the strategy of using the promise of tax cuts to compete with Democrats’ promises of cash and other benefits. In part as a consequence of that strategy, a great many Americans pay little or no federal income taxes, while many of the other federal taxes they pay are indirect or partly hidden. Mitt Romney was right: You can’t use tax cuts to buy off people who are net recipients of tax transfers. Figuring out what we can offer them that is consistent with our principles is the task of conservatives between now and the next election.

With all of those fundamentals in place, the only thing that will topple an incumbent POTUS is a major scandal. Fast & Furious & Solyndra should have been hammered over and over by all of the primary candidates. They blew it big time by attacking each other instead.

Lesson learned: GOP had better identify its winners very early on, support them, coach them on how to deal with the Enemedia, and teach them how to civilly debate each other without blowing up the party.

“Romney utterly failed on two of those, Social and Fiscal conservatism.”

Even if that is the case, defense more than makes up for it. We will soon have no nuclear weapons and utterly defenseless in the face of Iran, China and North Korea. It will get really scary soon and there’s nothing Congress, the states or the tea party can do about it.

7
posted on 11/07/2012 10:03:15 PM PST
by ari-freedom
(Election Day should be after Thanksgiving, not right after Halloween)

The RNC needs to make sure there are no more than three candidates from the get go. More than that is counter productive. Also they need to run their debates instead of letting the MSM run them, because their only goal is to make all of them look bad.

Even if that is the case, defense more than makes up for it. We will soon have no nuclear weapons and utterly defenseless in the face of Iran, China and North Korea. It will get really scary soon and theres nothing Congress, the states or the tea party can do about it.

I was never one to live my life based on the unprovable, extreme worst-case scenarios, especially, to use those as an excuse/reason for any of my choices/actions.

I'd rather keep a clear conscience and leave the outcome with God, do the right thing, trusting in his Providence and Grace.

After all, isn't that what all Christians, and even Jews, are called to do?

9
posted on 11/07/2012 10:11:16 PM PST
by SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)

I don’t give a flying (fill in the blank) what yet another reporter thinks should be my lesson. I’ve read the daily drivel from just about everywhere for almost a year. They’re all without a clue. They are no better at predicting the future or analyzing the past than the average joe on the street. So, please, mr reporter guy, just shut up and try reporting just the facts.

You cant use tax cuts to buy off people who are net recipients of tax transfers. Figuring out what we can offer them that is consistent with our principles is the task of conservatives between now and the next election.

This is ignored at peril. Elections now are about building interest group coalitions not ideology. If anything is to be learned from the Libertarian Party it’s that no one cares about abstract ideas but they do care about the bottom line. Thinking about the issue of the GOP bridging the gap with minority voters, one idea is that the GOP starts to invest in minority business interests. By helping to break the cycle of dependency on democrat funds, you may be able to bring some of the black business class into the GOP fold.

13
posted on 11/07/2012 11:05:47 PM PST
by garbanzo
(It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine)

Quote: “For many years, Republicans have relied on Jude Wanniskis Two Santa Claus theory, the strategy of using the promise of tax cuts to compete with Democrats promises of cash and other benefits. In part as a consequence of that strategy, a great many Americans pay little or no federal income taxes, while many of the other federal taxes they pay are indirect or partly hidden. Mitt Romney was right: You cant use tax cuts to buy off people who are net recipients of tax transfers. Figuring out what we can offer them that is consistent with our principles is the task of conservatives between now and the next election.”

I have an idea. It is difficult to tell people the pain Obama is causing them while administering a pain killer. Stop the unemployment benefits. If Obama wants to raise taxes, I say fine, lets raise them. Let us stop trying to convince the American Sheeple that this guy is bad for them while ensuring that they don’t feel the pain. Let’s bring the pain all the while holding Obama out as having “won” when he gets his way. That way, he owns the consequences. Over a fiscal cliff, great. Until it happens the American Sheeple just won’t get what it means. Time to reach rock bottom.

Oh and it is also time to declare war on the media. They are no more and no less than an unelected but ruling arm of the democrat party.

I know I will get flamed for this but here it goes. There is NO lessons from this election. The demographics changed just enough in 3 states that was crucial to Romney. Obama made enough promises to these sub-groups, like the “Dream Act”, Obamaphones, free health insurance, and free abortion pills, that he got their votes. It's time to let America go and let it crush under its own weight. Only then will just enough Americans wake up and realize we can't keep giving what we don't have.

There wasn’t a candidate in the GOP primary that could have crafted a better campaign in an attempt to hold the base while catering to Swing State voters. From the start the race was going to be determined by less than ten states.

Please someone name the perfect candidate who could have done it? Not even Reagan could have beaten Obama.

NONE of this means jack shiite. Obama was as weak as a kitten and could have been beaten by a name from the phone book. We were sucker punched by the Evangelicals who throw aside their love of country for hatred of Mormons. If those 14 million showed up and voted as they were expected to have, it would have been over by 10 minutes after the polls closed.

We were sucker punched by the Evangelicals who throw aside their love of country for hatred of Mormons.

Complete Bull crap. If anything, Evangelicals stayed home because they didn’t want to vote for a liberal. Romney is 85 percent of Obama. Not enough difference for the Evangelicals to get out of bed to vote. I don’t blame the Evangelicals, I blame liberal Romney. Nobody told him he had to flip-flop his entire life. He has zero core and people saw that. If we would have run a conservative with conviction, the election may have turned out differently. Romney is a liberal and that is why he lost...nothing at all to do with Mormonism.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.